Judging by most reaction to the league's announcement of division names, a new logo and 18 new football trophies, Delany might benefit from skipping town for a while.

I kid, I kid.

Here's the first half of my conversation with the commish (just as a heads up, any reference Delany makes to a "mark" means a logo):

Quote:

You settled on Legends and Leaders for the division names. What other possibilities did you strongly consider?

Jim Delany: We had one from Teddy [Greenstein], Stars and Stripes. We had Traditions and Legends. We had all of the Prairies, Lakes, and cities and countries. We had lots of names of people. Not much geography. People think [the choices are] generic. Well, everybody in the Midwest, in the country, had an opportunity to submit [suggestions].

Were there any people under consideration for division names, past commissioners and such?

JD: No. We thought about it a little bit, but not a lot. We pretty much dismissed the notion of naming it after people simply because the big ones were the coaches. There was a little commissioner talk, but not much. We just felt there was a much better way to get at that through the trophy process.

What about more generic geographical names: Plains, Great Lakes, Prairies, and so on?

JD: Well, we thought that those were not compelling. Like Coastal and Atlantic [in the ACC], you've got people in the mountains that are coastal. We've got schools and how do you tie them in? We've got people who are near cities and near prairies. When you really started doing it and testing it, you're going to run into anomalies of schools not necessarily being in prairies or on lakes. We really examined the lakes concept and we really examined the prairies concept, what I would call the geological concepts.

Do you think the response would be different if you had been more specific with the name choices?

JD: First of all, I take a little bit with the grain of salt any reaction that comes up in the first 10-20 seconds. The reality is any mark [logo] or any divisional name is a vessel, and it will be filled over time with experiences and memories. I don't care whether it's the mark or a name, it'll take on status, structure and meaning over time. It's not going to happen in the first hour.

Between the logo and the names, which process took longer?

JD: They're different kinds of processes. The mark is more a function of people reacting to professional [logos], being creative and then trying to tie it in to a little bit of history and a little bit of other marks and a little bit of usage. So it's a very different process than selecting the names, which I think is more tied to deciding which categories you're not going to go to and deciding which categories you will go to. If somebody thinks Mountains and Plains or Plains and Lakes are better, that's a value judgment. We think that we have a pretty good idea of who we are.

We think that there is connection to the Red Granges and the Gerald Fords and the Joe Paternos. We think that there's direct tie-ins, and it allows us to speak about our past. We think the leadership issue is a powerful issue, whether it's Tony Dungy or whether it's Pat Fitzgerald or whether it's [former Big Ten commissioner] Wayne Duke, whoever it is. We think that those things resonate and carry meaning that's tied to who we are, who we want to be. In the case of leadership, that's an awful lot about it, if you've ever been in a locker room or if you've ever been on a team. That's probably the No. 1 experience that people take away.

I resist the temptation to judge the judges because we're the creators. But I would say we've seen significant connection to who we are. Not to say others don't have it, but in terms of the 115 years and in terms of the kinds of people that have been turned out, whether it's the guy who runs Google or whether it's the person who ran the country or somebody like a Tony Dungy, we think that those leadership qualities are powerful.

Here's the second half of my interview with Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany on the league's new football division names, logo and football trophies. Check out Part I as well.

Quote:

With the logo, I see the connection to the past. What parts of it connect you to the present and to the future?

Jim Delany: I think the smaller usage is very adaptable to new media, and it's a smaller mark [logo]. Just like ESPN was not always ESPN, that's very adaptable. And the stacked and the horizontal give you a lot of ways to use it. We're big, strong, classical. I think the lettering on the old mark was powerful. This lettering is maybe a little less powerful because it's rounded and not nearly as chiseled. Maybe we didn't go from Hummer to convertible. Maybe we went from Hummer to a Prius, I don't know.

So the adaptability, is that what you like most about it?

JD: I think so. It's very adaptable. It's connected to the past. I'm not suggesting it's the Swoosh because it's not. But all of these marks, I remember when we did the first one 20 years ago, people looked at it and they weren't enamored by it right away. They said, 'How could you do Big Ten with 11,' and so forth. But I don't expect people to fall in love or embrace it [immediately] because I don't think that's what marks do. I think marks grow and take on meaning, based on memories and emotions over time. And then it becomes more familiar. And then it becomes yours.

Were you going into this with the idea of having so many new trophies?

JD: No, those two things are connected, the Legends/Leaders and building on the people. Those two concepts are connected.

What do you think about having some active coaches in the trophy names and quite a few people who are still alive?

JD: I don't feel restricted by some etiquette. I think we've got some unbelievable people who are active, Archie [Griffin] and Joe Paterno and Fitz [Pat Fitzgerald]. I don't think there's any reason to ignore them. I think there's a reason to embrace them and who they are and what they do. It makes it living. We've got some people who have been dead for 50 years and we've got people who are still participating. I think it shows continuity.

Overall, when will it be appropriate to judge these new elements?

JD: I don't think anything that deals with art or branding or names, you can judge it. I think time will tell. The question is whether it's sustainable, whether it's enduring and whether we're able to bring it to life. It's not a contest to see how quickly you can gain approval in the first hour of the unveiling. Would love to have it, but I think this stuff is judged as sort of how it works over time.

The Big Ten finally revealed the new names for its football divisions, along with a new logo and 18 (count 'em) new trophies for football.

Sadly, my two suggestions for division names -- Delany and Delaney, and Adam and Rittenberg -- did not make the cut.

I'll get to my reaction for each part below. Overall, I feel like many of you do: The league could have done better and didn't help its national perception, at least in the short term. But unlike many folks, I care a lot more about who is in the divisions than what they are called. The amount of attention this topic generated really surprised me.

Overall, the reaction from fans and media members hasn't been positive.

"Any time you have something new, whether it’s a mark or trophies, it takes some time to get used to," league commissioner Jim Delany said on a teleconference.

That might be wishful thinking.

DIVISION NAMES

Meh.

After months of taking suggestions and brainstorming possibilities, the Big Ten ended up with Legends and Leaders. Here's the breakdown:

While the league's intentions here are understandable -- to honor its rich history and long lineup of legendary figures -- the Big Ten got too caught up in avoiding specific names. Make no mistake: The Big Ten was never going to name the divisions Woody and Bo. Way too exclusive. But there are former commissioners who could have been honored or historical figures who represent this area of the country.

The league also wanted to avoid geography in the division names. While I completely agreed that geography shouldn't have been the deciding factor in determining how teams were assigned to divisions, I didn't have nearly as big of an issue with geographical distinctions for division names. Lakes and Plains would have been just fine with me.

The Big Ten also couldn't have gone wrong with names that sounded patriotic: Liberty and Freedom or Stars and Stripes (suggested by the Chicago Tribune's Teddy Greenstein) would work.

"People suggested Schembechler and Hayes," Delany said. "Any time you looked at it, it seemed to be too exclusive and not inclusive enough. ... As we looked at ourselves, we believed at the core of who we are are our traditions and heritage. And those traditions are largely people, legendary people."

The Big Ten recognized plenty of those people in the new trophies. But Legends and Leaders is too generic, a little too arrogant and too Little League for me. Another good point raised by Greenstein: Two divisions that start with the letter "L" have a negative connotation in sports.

LOGO

As my wife often reminds me, I don't have a great eye for design. Aside from being named "Most Improved" in a middle school art class, my skills in this department are limited.

The Big Ten's new logo has its flaws, but I can live with it. The mark, created by Pentagram Design, certainly comes off a bit retro and looks more like something that would have been done when Delany first became commissioner in 1990 than now.

There's no hidden "12" in the logo like there is with "11" in the current Big Ten logo.

"A lot of people thought we would use negative space to [use] 12," Delany said. "Pretty much everybody in the design world said, 'No, don't do that.' "

What the league tried to do was create a link back to its pre-Penn State logo with the B-I-G 1-0, substituting the "I" in Big as the No. 1. Asked about the "G" looking like the No. 6, which feeds into the conspiracy theory that the Big Ten eventually will expand to 16 teams, Delany said, "We were thinking 10, not 16."

TROPHIES

Of the three new elements, the Big Ten definitely did best here. While 18 trophies is extremely excessive, the league was able to honor some of its great players and coaches.

The big additions are the Stagg-Paterno Championship Trophy given to the winner of the Big Ten football title game, which beings next year. The trophy honors former University of Chicago coach Amos Alonzo Stagg and current Penn State coach Joe Paterno. The MVP of the title game receives the Grange-Griffin Trophy, which recognizes former Illinois star Red Grange and former Ohio State star Archie Griffin, the only two-time winner of the Heisman Trophy.

The complaint some have raised with these trophies is that they honor current Big Ten coaches like Paterno and Northwestern's Pat Fitzgerald, whose name appears on the Butkus-Fitzgerald Linebacker of the Year award.

I don't have a problem with this. We don't need to wait for Paterno to die or stop coaching to recognize what he means to the Big Ten and to college football. While he hasn't been in the Big Ten for most of his career, his presence in this league is felt.

Many of the league's greats are still alive, so why not recognize them?

"A lot of people say you can't honor somebody who was alive, you can’t honor somebody who was active," Delany said. "I don’t subscribe to those rules. We were trying to get a good blend of great people, deceased and alive, who stand for great athletic contributions."

I also like that none of the Big Ten's trophies will be connected with corporate sponsorships.

Whew. A lot to digest. I'll have more on the announcement, so stay tuned.

_________________

Quote:

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....

December 14th, 2010, 10:51 am

steensn

RIP Killer

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pmPosts: 13429

Re: Jim Delany on division names, logo

On Division names, can one really get excited? They aren't bad, aren't great, nothing to fuss over. I'm glad they kept the logo simple and didn't change the name. But as others have pointed out, that G looks a lot like a 6 haha

Not enamored at all with the division names and they got robbed for paying someone to design that logo. A sixth grader could of done a better job with the software that comes with your computer off the shelf.

_________________"When you eat crow, if you put barbecue on it, it's not so bad."-Brady Hoke

December 14th, 2010, 1:37 pm

steensn

RIP Killer

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pmPosts: 13429

Re: Jim Delany on division names, logo

BillySims wrote:

steensn wrote:

Blueskies wrote:

The division names are terrible. I thought they were a joke at first. Leaders and Legends? Is this the power rangers?

Also, why is there a 10 hidden in the logo? Shouldn't there be a 12 hidden to show the actual number of teams?

The artist consultants they asked said it was a bad idea to do the same thing again. They wanted to just honor the ten original teams they say.